Apparently the old, two-party system had had its day and the public were crying out for pluralism, cooperation and even coalition. Well maybe they were - for about five minutes or so - but the Liberal/SDP Alliance ended in tears in 1988 after public policy rows, irreconcilable personality differences and a disastrous performance in the 1987 general election which saw them fail to gain a single new seat.

The rise of New Labour and the demise of the the Tories at the fag end of the Major government gave precious few opportunities for a third force to flourish. Twenty years on from the Gang of Four and the Limehouse Declaration, and the 2001 second Labour landslide seemed to suggest that the old mould of politics, far from being broken, was as intact as ever, with one hegemony being replaced by another.

In fact, it took the disastrous decision to invade Iraq before the third party could make any real advances and even some of these were reversed at the recent election. It is not much more than an accident of electoral arithmetic, arising from Cameron’s failure to land a killer blow on a weakened and poorly led Labour Party, that some parts of our great nation are now ruled by Liberal ministers for the first time in nearly a century.

Of course the new arrangements have been accompanied by the same mould-breaking drivel that was being spouted in 1981. Now I don’t doubt that coalition politics could have the potential to attract new levels of support and therefore create long-term term problems for Labour as it seeks to rebuild. However, all political parties have to stand for something substantial other than a longing for the trappings of office, and neither Clegg nor Cameron are figures of substance. Furthermore, I do not see how the ideological differences that divide most Tories and Lib Dems can be papered over for longer than a few months. This is why there is now an excellent opportunity for Labour if they select a new leader capable of articulating new and distinctive policy priorities that are attractive to younger voters in particular.

For me the decision to back Ed Miliband is a no-brainer. I have watched this guy in action in tough ministerial meetings at Energy and Climate Change as well as at the dispatch box. He is a sharp, warm and intelligent communicator and, although with cabinet experience, he does not smell of the tired old Blair-Brown divisions that will haunt his main rivals. The younger Miliband is a genuine environmentalist, although he should have resigned over the third Heathrow runway, and this is an issue which will return to prominence and exercises more newer voters than old.

But irrespective of whoever gets to lead my party, for me life has already moved on. I’m now based for a while on the other side of the world in Sydney, in a country where Labour is in power both nationally and in a majority of the states. Two-party tribal politics is not only alive and kicking down here, it is in-yer-face, complete with some choice expletives.

So its goodbye to the brave new world of coalition politics in Britain, to yet another Labour leadership contest and, I’m afraid, to Daily Telegraph blogs. I’ve enjoyed covering the election period for a newspaper from the other side of the political tracks. Its been fun to occasionally read some of the more rabid comments from the not so brave, anonymous standard bearers of the Right, but it is now time to retreat back to our respective comfort zones.

The new MPs have a Prime Minister and a Deputy Prime Minister from what were once diametrically opposed political parties who look and sound like twins separated at boarding school. Having spent years attacking and loathing each other, scores of Lib Dem and Tory MPs now have to play happy families so that their leaders can enjoy the trappings of office - at least until the whole “rag-tag and bobtail coalition”, to quote the excellent Dennis Skinner, completely unravels. The Labour newbies, meanwhile, have to adjust to life in opposition under an acting leader who has wisely declined to take part in an endless contest between two people called Milliband. (For the record, I’m backing the one called Ed. )

I’ve heard some wonderfully naive nonsense about the new Parliament with its large new intake ushering an era of “new politics” bereft of the bad old ways. Well, the resignation of David Laws following the Telegraph’s revelations about his personal accommodation claims, coupled with Number 10’s clumsy attempt to censor the BBC’s Question Time panel, must make the new boys and girls feel they are back in a time warp rather than wandering in the sunlit uplands of a new world.

And of all of them are having to grapple with a crazy new system of allowances and a press pack just waiting to pounce on any mistake or indiscretion, however minor or inadvertent. With memories of the last “Manure Parliament” giving them nightmares, no wonder some of the newbies feel stranded on a high wire without a safety net. In fact, I’ve already seen one posting on ConservativeHome from a recently elected Tory MP wondering if they’ve made the worst mistake of their life.

Luckily, some good advice has been provided by kindly and experienced souls from across the party divide. I particularly liked Paul Goodman’s nine-point plan for newly elected members in which he said:

“Remember that your family and friends matter more, in the end, than being Under-Secretary of State for Ball Bearings and Cycle Clips. Give them time and trouble. Get out of the constituency when you feel you have to. Don’t do anything on Sundays unless you must. Make time for books, if you read them, films, if you see them, and passions, if you have them. Switch the BlackBerry on to silent mode and turn up the volume for Mozart… well, for LL Cool J, since you say that’s your thing. Cook dinner. Write a sonnet. Climb a mountain. And talking of writing, never, never trust a journalist. Except, of course, this one.”

Last week The House Magazine produced a handy Survival Guide for New Members which aims to help them settle in and avoid some of the more obvious pitfalls. The contributors include Tory Treasury Committee sage Michael Fallon on how to be effective on Select Committees; Labour’s Gisela Stuart and Ian McCartney on dealing with the Whips and the perils of the greasy pole of power; Conservative rebel Douglas Carswell on being an independent backbencher; and the scandal hit ex-Tory MP Michael Brown on handling the media. My own contribution on being a constituency MP was inevitably somewhat more parochial:

“Never lose touch with your constituency. Produce regular reports detailing your work, both in the patch and in Parliament, and try to get a column in your local paper. Pick your fights with care, but it is good to get a rebellion in as quickly as possible to put the whips in their place and show your constituents you are not a gutless patsy. Remember this bit of advice given to me in 1997 and pass it on to those who follow on from you: “No matter how tough things get, never forget that the House of Commons is the best megaphone in the world. Use it well and use it wisely for the issues that matterto you and your constituents and you won’t go far wrong”.”

I genuinely wish all our new legislators well, but I suspect that this Parliament is going to be heavy going, at least for those who don’t have access to a reliable political compass (and a private income).

Dave’s attempts to don his “heir to Blair” mantle by picking and winning an early fight with his more vocal backbenchers was always going to end in tears. Tony Blair rarely had any trouble getting his preferred candidate elected as chair of the Parliamentary Labour Party. Certainly in his first term, even the six representatives elected from the backbenches were unlikely to cause the whips too many anxious moments. In fact, it wasn’t until the 2005, post-Iraq parliament, when Blair’s power had begun to wane, that the PLP found its voice and started to elect officers who weren’t afraid to challenge the leadership on occasion. I spent nearly three years on Labour’s Parliamentary Committee under both Blair and Brown, during which time it operated as an useful brake on some of the dafter ministerial proposals and as an effective voice for backbench concerns.

Now that Cameron has, sensibly, climbed down over the 1922 changes, he has bought himself a little breathing space - though he has Brady to deal with, of course. But this row could be the first of many, as those who never liked or trusted Dave and his project have scented blood and will be tempted to flex their muscles in the future. The formidable David Davis is “on manoeuvres”, and not just over the late payment of allowances.

Senior Tory sources are also predicting serious ructions over plans to impose primary selection contests in the 200 safest seats, many of which are currently occupied by Dave’s fiercest critics. Our new Prime Minister will need to watch his back because, unlike Blair, he has never delivered an outright victory - and that gives him considerably less political capital to expend on internal battles.

“I shall make my commitment to guarantee, by any means at my disposal, that should John Bercow become Speaker, I will do my best to make sure that it is the one of the shortest served appointments in the grand, and glorious history of that coveted chair.”

Nad has run an internet and press campaign as ferocious as it is bonkers, which has tried to drag Bercow’s private life into the public arena. She has even gone as far as to declare him unfit to hold the office because of the political views held by his wife Sally and his failure to support her own attempts to restrict access to abortion services for women.
John Bercow, who was re-elected comfortably at the general election as MP for Buckingham, has confounded many of his critics on the Tory benches and is well on the way to becoming a successful reforming Speaker. He has already established the first Speaker’s Advisory Council on Public Engagement to give advice on how to restore the trust between Parliament and the public, granted Urgent Questions with more frequency, ensured better scrutiny of Ministers and a closer monitoring of responses to written questions, which previously tended to fall into a parliamentary Bermuda Triangle. He has introduced a monthly ballot for Members who would like to stage events in the Speaker’s House for charity and has been a powerful advocate for Commons reform.

However, Bercow could become the new coalition’s first constitutional crisis if Nad and her merry crew get their way when, by convention, the re-elected Speaker is given the nod to continue in the chair as one of the first acts of the new Parliament.

The plot to oust Bercow was frustrated in the last Parliament when the Tories on the Procedure Committee failed to get approval for their wheeze to do away with an open vote on the re-appointment of the Speaker and its replacement by a secret ballot or cowards’ charter, as it became known. There is no doubt that Nad and a handful of others will shout “object” when the time comes, and word is they plan to promote the mighty Ming in the unlikely event of them winning a division in the Commons to trigger a full blown election for a new Speaker.

At the election, Cameron and Clegg both gave strong endorsements of Bercow, who stood as “Speaker seeking Re-election” in the time-honoured fashion. Quite apart from the constitutional quandary of disregarding the decision of the electorate and the previous Parliament, the last thing the coalition leaders will want is to see their own commitment to reform engulfed in a massive row over the defrocking of a reforming Commons Speaker.

There are two other slight problems for the plotters. Firstly, no one is sure if Ming Campbell actually wants the job or has even been asked. Secondly, Nadine Dorries is probably the worst cheerleader for any campaign at the moment, given the controversy over her second home claims.

For all those bright-eyed, ambitious new MPs, sharing a division lobby with Nad and her bunch of dinosaurs would be a particularly dumb early career move .

Stand-in Labour leader Harriet Harman said that Parliament needed to consider how best to protect MPs. This is what everyone also said nine years ago after Liberal Democrat MP Nigel Jones was wounded and his aide, Andrew Pennington, stabbed to death in a Samurai sword attack at the party’s office in Cheltenham. Harman tells us: “One of the great strengths of the British political system is the everyday accessibility of MPs to their constituents but we can’t have a situation where MPs are at risk.”

Well, I’m afraid unless we permanently hide them away from the public, MPs are always going to be at risk from assault by the mad or bad. Despite holding my Friday night advice surgeries on a drop-in basis where anyone could turn up, I never experienced any violence, although it got close a couple of times. However, always at the back of my mind was what I would do if things got out of hand. I never held a drop-in session on my own and although the appointment-only Saturday surgeries were solo affairs I always insisted in taking a phone number and address in advance so my office knew who to expect. I will also confess to keeping a reassuringly large and heavy paperweight on my desk which, I’m pleased to say, never in the whole 13 years had to be put to an alternative use.

But not all was always sweetness and light in the former People’s Republic of Reading West, and I received my share of death threats, some of which we took seriously enough to call in the police. Most were from pathetic individuals and one particularly satisfying outcome was the brain-dead BNP member who inadvertently revealed his identity online and broke down in tears when arrested by the boys in blue. This not-so-noble member of the master race agreed to go on an anger management course and to write me a grovelling letter of apology in return for a police caution.
I took more seriously the attack on my constituency office, with attempts to kick in the door followed by the word “Jew” scrawled in large letters all over the front of the building. This came shortly after the Nigel Jones incident and some well publicised work I had been doing with the anti-fascist group Searchlight on the thuggish conduct of leading figures in the BNP and other Far Right organisations.

With two young women working largely on their own in the office for the best part of the week, it seemed only responsible to utilise the security budget that the Commons authorities had introduced for the installation of panic buttons, an intercom and security shutters. The equipment was duly delivered, only for us to discover that just 50 per cent of the cost was recoverable from the designated budget. The only way the full £6,000 bill could be met in full was either by cutting the wages of my staff or, as was eventually the case, to pay for it myself.

Here’s a job for the new Commons Leader, Sir George Young - to bring in security measures to protect, where possible, MPs and their staff from random attacks either in their surgeries or at their constituency offices. I can think of no other group of workers who have to dip into their own pockets to fund their own protection or that of their staff.
And, in the meantime, I wish a speedy recovery to Stephen Timms - one of the nicest, most decent politicians I’ve ever worked with.

Mind you I’m pleased that the nonsense of a Rainbow Coalition has been kicked into touch, as it was always a non-starter. The only coalition between Labour and the Lib Dems should have been one designed to establish how they work together in opposition to minimise the damage the Tories will try to do to the weak, poor and vunerable. Now a whole raft of dreadful Conservative policies will have Lib Dem fingerprints all over them. At least Labour will have clean hands and can look forward to an early general election with some relish, as I don’t give this alliance of the deluded more than two years.

There will be some squeaky bums on the Liberal benches as they realise what they have done. This is not a party prepared for or capable of government, with the single exception of the excellent Vince Cable. Clegg has ripped up the agreement that Lib Dem MPs made only a few days ago not to accept ministerial posts but only to try and work out a shared agenda. Many years ago, a Lib Dem council leader told me that trying to get all his colleagues facing in the same direction was akin to “herding cats”. Now the cat-herders are in government.

It would be churlish, however, not to acknowledge the qualities of the three main players in these last five days of political drama. Cameron, since his election as party leader four and a half years ago, has overseen a remarkabe turnaround in Conservative fortunes. Clegg has played a blinder in the inter-party negotiations and found his voice in the televised leaders’ debates, although this failed to translate into seats for the Lib Dems. Brown made a dignified exit and can take comfort from an election performance that exceeded expectations, although he did acknowledge his own role in Labour’s demise.

But let us save our last thoughts for the political geniuses over at The Guardian. Was this the “epoch-changing” coalition they had in mind when they encouraged their readers to vote Lib Dem, thereby putting David Cameron in Number 10?

“… nothing less than the construction of an epoch-changing government between Labour and the Liberal Democrats, with a mission to see Britain through the continuing economic crisis and create a reformed system of politics. Will that government now be formed? It is too soon to say and there are many very serious obstacles.”

You bet there are serious obstacles, starting first with the substantial number of Labour MPs who not only hate the Liberal Democrats but remain implacably opposed to any electoral reform. Incidentally, they are right about the former but wrong to reject AV as this is the one system other than the status quo which retains the all important constituency link.

Then there is the little matter of the numbers. In reality, a Labour government needs a majority of at least 20 to overcome the serial rebels on their own benches and this figure is bound to rise as compromises forced by the other coalition partners prove too much to stomach for many of the comrades.

Now add in the other partners - the Scottish and Welsh Nats and the Irish. All proponents of pork barrel politics whose collegiate approach to cutting the deficit will be “fine, but not in my back yard”.

Then there is the politics, or rather the lack of them, on display at the moment. A coalition with dubious democratic legitimacy, led in a few months’ time by another unelected Labour Prime Minister and faced with making swingeing cuts to front line public services whilst being constantly harried by an aggrieved Opposition, often with greater numbers and almost the entire press on their side would certainly be “epoch changing” but not in a good way. The ensuing chaos and inevitable wipe out at the next, and probably very early, general election would set back the liberal dream of a progressive political settlement for a generation.

Seemingly oblivious to either democratic niceties or political realities, The Guardian blathers on:

“The crucial change is that the possibility now exists to make a Lab-Lib deal happen. This is potentially a turning point in modern British politics - and a welcome one.”

No it isn’t - it’s a piece of nonsense and would be electoral suicide for both parties. The only sensible thing is to allow Cameron to form a minority government and watch the chinless wonders screw up under the pressure. Labour could renew and rebuild in opposition under a new, more popular, leader.

For now it’s time for my party to wake up, sniff the wind and recognise that this improbable coalition simply won’t work.

David Cameron’s team have responded seriously, acknowledging that no single party won the election and placing a referendum on the Alternative Vote on the table alongside an offer to enter a formal coalition with the LibDems.
For his part, Gordon Brown has behaved with great dignity and displayed some rare humility in announcing his intention to stand down and accepting personal blame for Labour’s defeat.

Being quite rightly locked out of the action for three days was obviously too much for many of the hacks to bear. Conspiracy theories abounded and have been reflected in today’s headlines. But pride of place for completely and utterly losing the plot has to go to Sky’s bombastic inquisitor in chief Adam Boulton, whose on-air row with Labour’s Alastair Campbell got him into hot water with his bosses.

Take a look at the transcript of the live exchange refereed by Jeremy Thompson. I defy anyone not to agree with Campbell’s last comment.

Campbell: “Adam, you’re obviously upset that David Cameron is not Prime Minister.”

Boulton: “I’m not upset …”

Campbell: “You are, you probably are.”

[Thompson laughs]

Boulton [voice raised]: “Don’t keep casting aspersions on what I think. I am commenting … don’t keep saying what I think.”

Campbell: “This is live on television, dignity, dignity.”

Boulton: “Don’t keep telling me what I think. This is what you do, you come on … you say no one won the election. I’m fed up with you telling me what I think.”

Campbell: “I don’t care what you’re fed up with. I don’t care what you’re fed up with. You can say what you like, I can tell you my opinion.”

Boulton: “Don’t tell me what I think.”

Thompson: “Alastair, you are being provocative and unnecessarily so …”

[Campbell then goes on to say Brown is entitled to have remained PM while another government is formed, and has handled the situation entirely properly. Boulton then loses it...]

Boulton: “In other words, it’s you … totally unelected, have plotted this …”

Campbell: “Me?’

Boulton: “Yes.”

Campbell: “And you are elected are you?”

Boulton: “No, but …”

Thompson: “Gentlemen, gentlemen. ”

Boulton: “You are the one who has cooked this up with Peter Mandelson.”

Campbell: “Oh my God, unbelievable. Adam calm down, calm down.”

[Camera pans away]

Boulton [out of vision]: “I actually care about this country.”

Campbell: “You think I don’t care.”

Boulton [inaudible]

Campbell: “Adam, you are a pompous little arse.”

For the negotiations to succeed, much will depend on the strength of character of the main players. Trouble is, there is no Blair-like stellar performer among the three party leaders. There are some similarities between Cameron and Blair, but not the ones Dave was dreaming of during his “heir to Blair” phase. Blair was unpopular with large sections of his own party, and now Dave is learning what it’s like to become unpopular, as the recriminations grow over his botched election campaign. Blair was tolerated by Labour traditionalists for as long as he kept winning, and it wasn’t until some prettty dire local election results in 2006 that his opponents felt emboldened openly to question his continued leadership.

The most Cameron can point to is a superficial rebranding of the Conservative Party, so Monday’s meeting of the 1922 Committee promises to be a bloody affair. Europe and PR are die-in-the-ditch issues for most Tory MPs, who are united with many on the Labour benches in their withering contempt for the opportunism of the Liberal Democrats. Hardly the basis for a marriage of convenience.

While the younger Clegg - in between well-publicised bouts of sexual athleticism - was a Tory student and may yet be tempted by his former political playmates, the Lib Dems have very clear procedures which effectively tie the hands of their leader. “It’s not up to him,” one Tory-hating Lib Dem MP told me with some certainty. Meanwhile, Tory activists, including the noble Lord Tebbit, are finding their voices and discovering a zest for the sort of internal party democracy they never saw the need for until now.

The length and breadth of the country, Labour and Tory MPs and councillors have just fought off some particularly foul local Lib Dem campaigns based on lies and smears. Now their leaders want them to lie down with the enemy. Expect much bilateral chatter between the warhorses of Labour and Conservative this week.

In any democracy, a fourth term should be a big ask. Even more so with a global recession, a bank bailout and a governing party with empty coffers led by a leader whose communication skills are, to say the least, somewhat challenged. The question for Cameron is: why didn’t he storm home on Thursday? There should have been champagne corks popping in CCHQ instead of soul-searching and talk of back-door deals with the gay-hating bigots of Ulster. A hung Parliament shouldn’t have even been on the cards.

As it happens I got it wrong, too. I really did think that a combination of Ashcroft’s money, Brown’s unpopularity and electoral confusion would see the Tories home. Their well-funded marginal seat strategy had been effective, and tactical voting just ain’t what it was. Otherwise intelligent people had been asking me in seats where Labour was either the incumbent or the main challenger if they should vote Lib Dem to stop the Tory winning. There was a real danger that a host of Labour seats would fall to the Tories as the tactical vote unwound.

Now that the Conservatives have fallen so wonderfully short of an absolute majority, the recriminations amongst Tory MPs will grow louder in the coming days. The horror of getting into bed with a party committed to an amnesty for illegal immigrants, closer ties with Europe and a PR system aimed at producing permament coalition government will be simply too much for them to bear. And, much to my surprise, all is not lost for Labour. So, whatever the explanation for Thursday’s results, I can only say: let’s hear it for Dave, Gideon, Andy and Steve and all the other Tory geniuses who threw away what, not so long ago, looked like the “unloseable election” of 2010.